←back to thread

577 points mooreds | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.769s | source
Show context
matthewdgreen ◴[] No.42178691[source]
This would be an excellent time for Germany to announce that it is tripling munitions production, and that they’re going to do whatever they have to do to protect the territorial integrity of Europe. But they won’t.
replies(4): >>42178780 #>>42180637 #>>42181095 #>>42186464 #
looperhacks ◴[] No.42180637[source]
Our governing coalition just split and there will be early elections (most likely) in February. Nobody has a majority right now, any anmouncement is currently unlikely. In fact our lovely head of the Government just reaffirmed that we won't send taurus to the ukraine.
replies(1): >>42181176 #
blub ◴[] No.42181176[source]
These long-range missiles are a short-time tactic designed to merely hurt the Russians or prevent them from doing certain actions under threat of pain and not a real strategy. Ukraine hasn’t had any battlefield successes since the Kursk Hail Mary which failed early and is now only maintained with the hope of improving their negotiating position when the time comes.

The approval of long-range strikes by the US & co likely means that Ukraine’s position was getting even worse than expected.

Furthermore, it became clear from the leak of German military communications that it would be German soldiers who would have to operate the weapons.

All in all this seems like a case of Scholz knowing Germany’s capabilities and risks and the public overestimating the former while dismissing the latter.

replies(2): >>42183522 #>>42188659 #
1. cmrdporcupine ◴[] No.42188659[source]
Regardless of your other points, I think approval of long range strikes has more to do with Biden doing what he can before leaving office. And leaving a calculus for Trump: keep with the policy and irk Putin and his other patrons, or cancel it and look weak and anti-Ukraine.

This decision might have been made earlier if the election hadn't been in the way.